[EM] inaccurate Fargo approval voting results

[Michael Garman]

I’m just asking that everyone be held to the same standards, Robert.
On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 3:32 PM robert bristow-johnson <
rbj at audioimagination.com> wrote:

>
>
> > On 06/08/2024 12:36 PM EDT Michael Garman <michael.garman at rankthevote.us>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > It’s still implying that approval guarantees majority winners. You’re
> twisting yourself into knots to avoid the implication they clearly meant to
> present.
> >
> >
>
> Like what implication are these folks making?
>
> https://www.betterballotvermont.org/how-rcv-works
>
> "If your favorite candidate can’t win, your vote counts instantly for your
> second choice, ..."
>
> falsehood.
>
> "[RCV] will ensure that the winner has the support of a true majority of
> voters."
>
> another falsehood.
>
> "Ranked choice voting allows more than two candidates to compete without
> fear of a “spoiler effect” ... "
>
> another falsehood.
>
> "Ranked choice voting ensures majority rule, rather than allowing a
> candidate to win with just 40 percent of the vote in a plurality."
>
> They evidently think that 48% is a majority.
>
> Michael, you might wanna be careful about being the pot calling the kettle
> "black".
>
>
> --
>
> r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com
>
> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
>
> .
> .
> .
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list
> info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240608/c339cfe1/attachment.htm>